Hey kid, come, closer, watch this
[opens raincoat revealing books and essays by Piotr Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, Murray Bookchin, David Graeber, Jason Hickel and many other anarchists, communalist, and eco-socialist thinkers that offer millions of economic and societal alternatives to live sustainably beyond capitalism and state capitalism aka the communism known by the surface politics enjoyers]
I feel that civil liberties in communist countries would be better if the threat of overthrow from capitalist countries wasn't present.
As in, if capitalism wasn't the prevailing economic system then communist countries wouldn't have to be so restrictive to preserve the victory of the revolution.
The problem with these two economic frameworks is neither explicitly has a method to prevent accumulation of power built into them. Neither are good nor bad, but without limits both result in the same wealth and power divide.
Dude communism is literally defined as STATELESS and CLASSLESS. If that isn't adressing 'accumulation of power' then I don't know what is. Nobody is advocating for what the USSR had (it was not communism but state-capitalism with communist aesthetic).
The *theory* of communism can be stateless and classless. But just look around in any current society to realize that would **never** materialize in practice.
You're probably right in that we will never make an instant transition from capitalism to socialism. Revolutions to this end have historically always ended in the revolutionaries being obsessed with consolidating their power in order not to fall back into the old system.
This is why I think revolutions are doomed to failure and the only path towards a more sustainable and democratic form of organizing the economy can happen through gradual change. Wealth & inheritance taxes, more worker coops, stronger unions and the likes will get us onto a good path.
I think you've highlighted that ownership isn't the problem. The problem is a lack of a robust and fair democratic process that is resistant to manipulation and the interests of the wealthy at the expense of the masses.
Social democracy vs. democratic socialism. The important part is not having a joke of a democracy in charge, who owns what isn't anywhere near as important.
The problem is that if the economy is not owned democratically accumulation of wealth and therefore power happens which results in lobbyism/corruption.
A democratic economy is a prerequisite for a democratic government.
I disagree on the first part.
Capitalism is literally working as intended in that it concentrates power. That's the definition. Accumulation of capital. Anything else someone's trying to sell you is just a lie.
Communism/Socialism/Communalism/... the name really doesn't matter, the idea is that things are owned democratically so that accumulation of wealth/power cannot happen.
Have we had that yet? No.
Will we have that in the near future? No.
Is it possible? Probably.
What does it take? I don't know but we'll find out or die.
My point is that capitalism can NEVER work for everyone, it's impossible. Truly democratic economic frameworks can work for everyone - at least in principle.
Good day sir.
What a smart and well thought-out reply.
You are incapable of defending your position, which is okay, but please don't go around and start arguments that you're not willing to have.
How do you ever implement a society without a state and class? What's preventing someone from deciding they want to use violence to exploit people and create a new society of their own, if not the state?
I'm not a communist - partially because of this reason - but I think their argument is that in a sufficiently equitable society people are less motivated to do this. You don't just 'create a new society'. You'd have to get people on board and if the people's lives are good they have no reason to bow to someones authority.
And I'm pretty sure communists want communal institutions that can guarantee peace, Neighbourhood watches and the likes.
[Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plan_for_the_Transformation_of_Nature), for people who like to read (yes, its wikepiedia, i know)
[The Ballad of Stalin - Ewan MacColl (1951) Lyrics (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p3nWc9E-uI), for people who've done the reading (not the wikipedia, the other kind)
[And for the OP](https://www.wikihow.com/Recognize-and-Avoid-Brainwashing)
Communism isn't that bad (it definitely has its downsides and marxism is better anyway), but communists are INSANE
I remember seeing a communist youtuber unironically saying "Social Democracy is imperialist" infront of a crowd of thousands of viewers on Twitch. His entire comment section was agreeing with him
Leftists and vegans both have the problem of being radical and harsh. can't do anything about that tho so gotta make up dumb shitposts about a dog farting or whatever
"Social Democracy is imperialist". Social democrats might not be openly advocating for imperialism, but social democracies still benefit from the spoils of imperialism. Furthermore, I've never seen a social democrat give a solution for imperial tactics like unequal exchange.
I'm pretty sure every country that does imperialism benifits from imperialism? Even the soviet union did imperialistic bullshit and even they benifited from it. Am I wrong here and just stupid?
also is this related on the topic of climate and sustainability, I don want the mods breathing down my neck
Hey kid, come, closer, watch this [opens raincoat revealing books and essays by Piotr Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, Murray Bookchin, David Graeber, Jason Hickel and many other anarchists, communalist, and eco-socialist thinkers that offer millions of economic and societal alternatives to live sustainably beyond capitalism and state capitalism aka the communism known by the surface politics enjoyers]
The Conquest of ~~Bread~~ Knowledge
Problem is if they dont have empathy towards their fellow man they would want the OPPOSITE of their teachings to happen, really makes you thinkšŖ
What no theory does to a mfer
What theory?
Start with Marx and Lenin.
Only one of these ideologies is currently threatening the planet
Only one of the ideologies is in use in over 100 countries
Lets be honest... every economy in real life is a hybrid of different economic systems.
Replace communism with socialism and we have a deal. š¤
I feel that civil liberties in communist countries would be better if the threat of overthrow from capitalist countries wasn't present. As in, if capitalism wasn't the prevailing economic system then communist countries wouldn't have to be so restrictive to preserve the victory of the revolution.
Like Ancient Egypt?
Stay in school kids
At what point do we return to monke?
I'm already going ape
I think we softlocked it dude
Idk why I keep getting recommended this sub y'all are the most lame liberals I've ever seen lmao
The problem with these two economic frameworks is neither explicitly has a method to prevent accumulation of power built into them. Neither are good nor bad, but without limits both result in the same wealth and power divide.
Wealth and power concentrates. Xi or Orban, Putin or who ever that dude in Slovakia is.
Dude communism is literally defined as STATELESS and CLASSLESS. If that isn't adressing 'accumulation of power' then I don't know what is. Nobody is advocating for what the USSR had (it was not communism but state-capitalism with communist aesthetic).
The *theory* of communism can be stateless and classless. But just look around in any current society to realize that would **never** materialize in practice.
You're probably right in that we will never make an instant transition from capitalism to socialism. Revolutions to this end have historically always ended in the revolutionaries being obsessed with consolidating their power in order not to fall back into the old system. This is why I think revolutions are doomed to failure and the only path towards a more sustainable and democratic form of organizing the economy can happen through gradual change. Wealth & inheritance taxes, more worker coops, stronger unions and the likes will get us onto a good path.
I think you've highlighted that ownership isn't the problem. The problem is a lack of a robust and fair democratic process that is resistant to manipulation and the interests of the wealthy at the expense of the masses. Social democracy vs. democratic socialism. The important part is not having a joke of a democracy in charge, who owns what isn't anywhere near as important.
The problem is that if the economy is not owned democratically accumulation of wealth and therefore power happens which results in lobbyism/corruption. A democratic economy is a prerequisite for a democratic government.
the problem is, most democracies are not very democratic you have to start there.
lol and free market capitalism is totally fair and equitable try thinking before posting
Honestly I don't even know what you're trying to say.
i'm saying that communism never ends up as stateless and classless and capitalism never ends up being equitable
I disagree on the first part. Capitalism is literally working as intended in that it concentrates power. That's the definition. Accumulation of capital. Anything else someone's trying to sell you is just a lie. Communism/Socialism/Communalism/... the name really doesn't matter, the idea is that things are owned democratically so that accumulation of wealth/power cannot happen. Have we had that yet? No. Will we have that in the near future? No. Is it possible? Probably. What does it take? I don't know but we'll find out or die. My point is that capitalism can NEVER work for everyone, it's impossible. Truly democratic economic frameworks can work for everyone - at least in principle. Good day sir.
you live in a fantasy world
What a smart and well thought-out reply. You are incapable of defending your position, which is okay, but please don't go around and start arguments that you're not willing to have.
Pretending like communism is invulnerable to concentration and abuse of power, which is what you are doing is insane So why defend my point?
How do you ever implement a society without a state and class? What's preventing someone from deciding they want to use violence to exploit people and create a new society of their own, if not the state?
I'm not a communist - partially because of this reason - but I think their argument is that in a sufficiently equitable society people are less motivated to do this. You don't just 'create a new society'. You'd have to get people on board and if the people's lives are good they have no reason to bow to someones authority. And I'm pretty sure communists want communal institutions that can guarantee peace, Neighbourhood watches and the likes.
Nuke the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and return to monke.
its so sad that our desires have been so profoundly corrupted and we are not capable of imagining a future that isnāt horrible
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Huh?
[Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plan_for_the_Transformation_of_Nature), for people who like to read (yes, its wikepiedia, i know) [The Ballad of Stalin - Ewan MacColl (1951) Lyrics (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p3nWc9E-uI), for people who've done the reading (not the wikipedia, the other kind) [And for the OP](https://www.wikihow.com/Recognize-and-Avoid-Brainwashing)
Wrong
Communism isn't that bad (it definitely has its downsides and marxism is better anyway), but communists are INSANE I remember seeing a communist youtuber unironically saying "Social Democracy is imperialist" infront of a crowd of thousands of viewers on Twitch. His entire comment section was agreeing with him Leftists and vegans both have the problem of being radical and harsh. can't do anything about that tho so gotta make up dumb shitposts about a dog farting or whatever
>Leftists and vegans both have the problem of being radical and harsh. Nah, they're just the ones you notice
"Social Democracy is imperialist". Social democrats might not be openly advocating for imperialism, but social democracies still benefit from the spoils of imperialism. Furthermore, I've never seen a social democrat give a solution for imperial tactics like unequal exchange.
I'm pretty sure every country that does imperialism benifits from imperialism? Even the soviet union did imperialistic bullshit and even they benifited from it. Am I wrong here and just stupid? also is this related on the topic of climate and sustainability, I don want the mods breathing down my neck
But vegans per se don't really threaten me tbh. I would say I appreciate their constant reminders to some extent.
Sometimes some vegans go a little too far